D&D 5E Which of these UA subclasses do you HATE?

[Leatherhead]

Missing there: Brute Fighter

The Brute Fighter is already dead and buried. They even removed them from D&D Beyond.

 

[delph]

The Brute Fighter is already dead and buried. They even removed them from D&D Beyond.

why? that was my one of the most favorite UA subclass

 

[Paul Farquhar]

why? that was my one of the most favorite UA subclass

It was planned for the Ravnica book, along with the Invention wizard. Both ended up on the cutting room floor.

Even I feel it's a little mean-spirited to pile hate onto subclasses that are already dead.

Edit: In any case, the Psionic Warrior and Rune Knight both have some similarities to the Brute.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I still don't even get what there is to hate about The Revived other than it should be part of a series of subclasses that every class can get.

That's plenty. It's not like WotC is likely to add a series of Revived subclasses for every class.

Now, if it was made psionic (which would be quiet easy to do), then they could plausibly be part of a series of subclasses, and therefore not hated. But it isn't so it is.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I'm not particularly hung up on identifying it as specifically the "Be the Nameless One" subclass. Fiction is full of heroes back from death, or the verge of it. The Crow, Ghost Rider, the Bride from Kill Bill, the recent fad for reincarnation stories in anime, the list goes on.

But I make it a deliberate policy not to treat anything in D&D as something indented to replicate an outside character. Take inspiration from them, sure, but square peg into a round role is an understatement for how badly trying to directly import characters can go. Even characters from a D&D video game.

I'm not sure I entirely agree with that. Take the Soul Knife for example. The original 2nd edition Soul Knife was very clearly based on the X-man Psylocke. But this version doesn't seem to be inspired by anything apart from an attempt to "give the fans what they want" and as such it is bland and flavourless.

I think it's a good idea to start with a prototype character, but then expand your design so that it can incorporate other, similar characters.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I really dislike Arcane Tradition: Psionics as people may know haha. It's inept and clumsy and half-hearted. Aberrant Mind also sucks because it tries to do something but again only goes part of the way. All the others are between meh and yay.

 

[Jd Smith1]

I only use the PHB (and my setting precludes one class and one race from the PHB). The plethora of classes and sub-classes and races is why I left AD&D (1e) and didn't return until 2019.

 

[Weiley31]

It has a unique power to break plots.

Some fantasy storylines make discovering the True Name of some entity or other a key plot point. Arch-fiends and the like go to great ends to conceal them. And now some 2nd level wizard can come along and uncover the deepest secret with no effort at all, and there is nothing even the most powerful arch-fiend can do to stop them.

That's why you make your Onomancer character be an EXTREME noob at the long lost art of Onomancey. Like multiple arcane traditions have discussed the concepts of it but all are seen as theories (just like the various discussions on the phenomenon known as Spell Touched. But then only crazy scholars at Candlekeep even bother with THAT subject and its own baggage.)

Your character would be JUST learning it: Onomaney So whenever it does it's thing, your not gaining the WHOLE True Name of the being. Just tiny fragments/snippets of it. Even at Max level, your character STILL can't break the plot like that unless the plot or dice demand it. Bob the farmer, okay, you can make him do a backflip two times. Orcus the Demon Prince of The Undead? Sorry but your two letter Alphabet of "G" and "U" are only two letters in his cosmic Social Security Number.


If your lvl 2 character could TRULY learn the actual FULL True Name of something, then why bother rolling the dice?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Or, rather than having to justify nerfing the class, you could just not have it in the first place?

 

[Weiley31]

I'm not sure I entirely agree with that. Take the Soul Knife for example. The original 2nd edition Soul Knife was very clearly based on the X-man Psylocke. But this version doesn't seem to be inspired by anything apart from an attempt to "give the fans what they want" and as such it is bland and flavourless.

I think it's a good idea to start with a prototype character, but then expand your design so that it can incorporate other, similar characters.

I see the Rogue Subclass Soulknife as a non experience adept with no training and winging it. Mike Mearls Soulknife is more the formal training/Kalastar branch. Both need an Upgrade system for their Psi-Blades.

So I like the rogue subclass one giving it "stats" or a damage die. Mike Mearls Soulknife makes it seem like I should be using anything else BUT my Psi-Blade as my main weapon.